MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386225339 · doi:10.5206/mt.v3i2.15660

On the Certification of the Kinematics of 3-DOF Spherical Parallel Manipulators

2023· article· en· W4386225339 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexandre Lê, Fabrice Rouillier, Damien Chablat, Guillaume Rance

Bibliographic record

VenueMaple Transactions · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsWorkspaceGravitational singularitySingularityFocus (optics)RobotParallel manipulatorControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceRobot kinematicsWork (physics)CertificationControl engineeringControl (management)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringClassical mechanicsMechanical engineeringGeometryMathematical analysisMobile robotPhysicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to study a specific kind of parallel robot: Spherical Parallel Manipulators (SPM) that are capable of unlimited rolling. A focus is made on the kinematics of such mechanisms, especially taking into account uncertainties (e.g. on conception & fabrication parameters, measures) and their propagations. Such considerations are crucial if we want to control our robot correctly without any undesirable behavior in its workspace (e.g. effects of singularities). In this paper, we will consider two different approaches to study the kinematics and the singularities of the robot of interest: symbolic and semi-numerical. By doing so, we can compute a singularity-free zone in the work- and joint spaces, considering given uncertainties on the parameters. In this zone, we can use any control law to inertially stabilize the upper platform of the robot.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaple TransactionsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207